Section 66A arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right to freedom


3


The Supreme Court on August 02, 2021 issued notice to States, Union Territories and Registrar of High Courts during a plea filed by Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) seeking varied directions and pointers against the FIRs beneath provision of Section 66A affected down by Shreya Singhal case judgment. A Bench comprising Justice RF Nariman and Justice BR Gavai throughout the hearing asked Senior Advocate Sanjay Parikh showing the petitioner to make States additionally parties that the Court may make a ‘comprehensive correct order’. The Bench reasoned that this was as a results of Police is ultimately a State subject Judiciary, that we will pay attention of individually however Police is additionally there during this instance. There should be one correct order during this as a result of this cannot continue”, the Bench aforementioned.
Supreme Court had on July 5 issued notice whereas expressing shock at the practice of police registering FIRs underneath Section 66A of the Information Technology Act that was affected down by the highest court within the 2015 judgment within the Shreya Singhal case. In a plea by the organization, folks Union for Civil Liberties, a bench of Justices RF Nariman and BR Gavai declared that they “will pass comprehensive order in order that matter of booking beneath the scrapped section 66A of IT Act is settled once and for all.”
The petition declared that the scrapped section continued to be in use not solely at police stations however additionally in trial courts across the country. To which, the bench responded, “Judiciary we will pay attention of individually however police is additionally there. There must be one correct order as a result of this cannot continue.” Earlier, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs had written to states asking them to not register cases underneath the repealed provision and withdraw any such case which will are filed. “Amazing. what’s occurring is terrible,” remarked Justice Nariman as Senior Advocate Sanjay Parikh player the court’s attention to however cases have inflated steady over the years despite the March twenty four, 2015, ruling within the Shreya Singhal v. Union of India case that affected down section 66A for “being offending of Article 19(1) (a) and not saved underneath Article 19(2).” Section 66A authorized police to form arrests over what policemen, in terms of their subjective discretion, might construe with as “offensive”.
Reported by: – Vidit Rastogi
Amity University, Lucknow


Like it? Share with your friends!

3
Manish Tiwari

0 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Choose A Format
Personality quiz
Series of questions that intends to reveal something about the personality
Trivia quiz
Series of questions with right and wrong answers that intends to check knowledge
Poll
Voting to make decisions or determine opinions
Story
Formatted Text with Embeds and Visuals
List
The Classic Internet Listicles
Countdown
The Classic Internet Countdowns
Open List
Submit your own item and vote up for the best submission
Ranked List
Upvote or downvote to decide the best list item
Meme
Upload your own images to make custom memes
Video
Youtube, Vimeo or Vine Embeds
Audio
Soundcloud or Mixcloud Embeds
Image
Photo or GIF
Gif
GIF format